Support NeoGAF

[Jezbollah]

Watching Blair now. His arguments are absolutely spot on. But, as we're all too aware, people will just attack the messenger and not the message. Brexiteers will forever double down on stupid than begin to entertain the notion that they may be wrong.

He's not wrong, he's just the wrong person to deliver this message. His credibility is shot.

 

[*Splinter]

I'd vote for 'im

 

[Funky Papa]

Some time ago I predicted that General Motors would be the first car manufacturer to get fucked over by Brexit. The PSA deal may precipitate things.

Clark had previously contacted GM President Dan Ammann to express concern over the future of Opel's UK plants. Clark said on Thursday he had been reassured by GM that the firm did not intend to "rationalize" its Vauxhall operations in Britain.

...

GM builds the Astra compact car in Ellesmere Port, northwest England, and light commercial vans in Luton, near London. Ellesmere Port is vulnerable to closure because local parts content is 24 percent, compared with a 41 percent average for UK car plants, Garel Rhys, a motor industry academic at the Cardiff Business School, said.

...

Two sources close to PSA told Reuters that job and plant cuts were part of the French automaker's ongoing discussions over a potential deal to buy GM's Opel and Vauxhall brands, with UK sites in the front line.

"It's much easier to cut jobs in Britain than Germany," one source with knowledge of the discussions between PSA and GM said, adding that Britain's move to leave the European Union was also a factor in the talks. "Restructuring is very likely to happen at the Vauxhall plants," that source added.

...

Ellesmere Port may be particularly at risk when the current Astra comes up for replacement in 2021, analysts at LMC Automotive said in a note, adding that the model could be consolidated with the next Peugeot 308 platform.

...

Germany accounts for half of GM Europe's 38,000 staff. Vauxhall employs 4,500 people in Britain, as well as supporting 17,000 jobs in its supply chain and 20,000 at sales outlets.

Full disclosure: my girlfriend works for GM Europe. Everybody but Poland and Spain is bracing for massive redundancies (although Polish and Spanish workers are also obviously antsy).

 

[sammex]

Blair is the only messenger.

Coming out this hard against Brexit is career suicide for any current politician. Thankfully he has a high enough profile that he's not just being dismissed out of hand and what he is saying is getting a lot of coverage, because it's an important and sensible message.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

He is arguing the Lib Dem side. Events make strange bedfellows.

 

[theaface]

Blair is the only messenger.

Coming out this hard against Brexit is career suicide for any current politician. Thankfully he has a high enough profile that he's not just being dismissed out of hand and what he is saying is getting a lot of coverage, because it's an important and sensible message.

I hear this a lot, but I just don't buy it. Sure, speaking out about Brexit will always be unpopular with the fanatic leavers. But what about the 48% who don't want Brexit? Or the huge swathes of the population who didn't vote? Or the Leave voters with voter remorse? Or the people who, either Remain or Leave, don't want to leave the single market?

It's frankly disgusting how the narrative has been manipulated so that anyone who doesn't get on board with May's version of Brexit is an enemy of the people and a moaner. It's folly to assume that there isn't a large but less vocal continent of people in the UK who want someone to be their voice (because it sure as hell won't be Corbyn).

 

[Roberto Larcos]

He is arguing the Lib Dem side. Events make strange bedfellows.

Pre-Iraq War, Blair got on very well with the Lib Dems. He's more centre-left, which is the ground the Lib Dems have traditionally sought to occupy.

 

[sammex]

I hear this a lot, but I just don't buy it. Sure, speaking out about Brexit will always be unpopular with the fanatic leavers. But what about the 48% who don't want Brexit? Or the huge swathes of the population who didn't vote? Or the Leave voters with voter remorse? Or the people who, either Remain or Leave, don't want to leave the single market?

It's frankly disgusting how the narrative has been manipulated so that anyone who doesn't get on board with May's version of Brexit is an enemy of the people and a moaner. It's folly to assume that there isn't a large but less vocal continent of people in the UK who want someone to be their voice (because it sure as hell won't be Corbyn).

I totally agree but the press wields a huge amount of influence and the leavers are so vociferous that the drown out more moderate voices. I don't know how anyone can overcome that in the current climate.

 

[War Peaceman]

Hilariously pathetic that IDS calls Blair's Brexit speech 'arrogant and bullying'.

 

[chromatic9]

I wanted a new referendum because I don't feel the original debate was any good. I was waiting each month for the silliness to stop and the real debate to begin. I thought there was grounds based on false info regarding the 350m which may have swayed a floating voter for another referendum.

The issue with another ref is what makes the next one definitive, the losing side will say hold on. It was explicitly said this is it, no ref each year.

What I can't believe is how such a slim majority it taking us out. If you've been in the EU for 40 years, I think you can't just leave over a tiny percentage who might be won on propaganda or false info, or uncertainty. Leaving the EU is not like unhooking the caravan, it's a huge costly web to untangle so I think a 60% or 55% majority should've been set up beforehand. You can then try again in 15-20 years, see what the appetite is to leave.

What would be interesting in a new ref is the turnout for the younger voter which was around 65-70% last time, could it be higher after the fallout and people are more engaged after the result and also that feeling of remain will win surely, not much point in voting crowd..

 

[Theonik]

I wanted a new referendum because I don't feel the original debate was any good. I was waiting each month for the silliness to stop and the real debate to begin. I thought there was grounds based on false info regarding the 350m which may have swayed a floating voter for another referendum.

The issue with another ref is what makes the next one definitive, the losing side will say hold on. It was explicitly said this is it, no ref each year.

What I can't believe is how such a slim majority it taking us out. If you've been in the EU for 40 years, I think you can't just leave over a tiny percentage who might be won on propaganda or false info, or uncertainty. Leaving the EU is not like unhooking the caravan, it's a huge costly web to untangle so I think a 60% or 55% majority should've been set up beforehand. You can then try again in 15-20 years, see what the appetite is to leave.

What would be interesting in a new ref is the turnout for the younger voter which was around 65-70% last time, could it be higher after the fallout and people are more engaged after the result and also that feeling of remain will win surely, not much point in voting crowd..

Ironically, Nigel Farage wanted it being a strong majority or leave the option open for another referendum thinking they'd lose narrowly.

The SNP wanted it to be a majority in all countries. The Tories rejected both proposals.

 

[chromatic9]

Some time ago I predicted that General Motors would be the first car manufacturer to get fucked over by Brexit. The PSA deal may precipitate things.




Full disclosure: my girlfriend works for GM Europe. Everybody but Poland and Spain is bracing for massive redundancies (although Polish and Spanish workers are also obviously antsy).

GM getting fucked over by Brexit seems a little harsh.

GM has 16 consecutive years of losses amounting to over 15 billion. Something has to done about. If Brexit never happened we'd still be here and Peugeot buying Opel/Vauxhall would be dangerous for UK and Germany just the same as it's part owned by the French government. Naturally if they bought it, jobs in the UK would be in danger. I can't find any PSA UK locations expect the obvious sales part. They've chose to avoid the UK.

If anything Brexit just makes UK jobs more uncertain.

GM is not getting fucked over by Brexit at all.

 

[Mr. Sam]

I totally agree but the press wields a huge amount of influence and the leavers are so vociferous that the drown out more moderate voices. I don't know how anyone can overcome that in the current climate.

Hey buddy, it said right there on the ballot paper: "Do you want to leave the EU, and the customs union, and the single market, and scrap freedom of movement, as quickly as possible with little thought to a transitional period or preparedness on our part?" And the people overwhelmingly said yes. 65 million people are behind it. If only traitors like you would stop trying to frustrate the will of the people!

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Pre-Iraq War, Blair got on very well with the Lib Dems. He's more centre-left, which is the ground the Lib Dems have traditionally sought to occupy.

Farron at our autumn conference: "Blair is like the Stone Roses. I prefer his early work."

I personally am satisfied with the pre-Afghanistan Blair government, even if Brown was pivoting away from Prudence by then. The dumpster fire that Blair threw us into along with Bush has catapulted us into a generation haunted by Islamophobia and mistrust of democracy.

Blair's speech today is words. It's Lib Dems on the ground campaigning against Brexit. The war on the doorstep is far more important than on the TV screen.

 

[chromatic9]

Blair's speech doesn't seem to have had much impact except for comments on the BBC website. We'll have to see if it grows.

 

[Number45]

Farron at our autumn conference: "Blair is like the Stone Roses. I prefer his early work."

OK. I'm definitely voting Lib Dem.

 

[tuxfool]

Is Labour's Brexit dilemma being misunderstood?

But, you may ask, what about the position in those seats that Labour actually won in 2015? Is it not this that matters? In fact, the answer proves to be much the same. According to the BES, in Labour-held seats across Britain as a whole 63% of Labour voters voted to Remain, exactly the same as the proportion across the country as a whole. As we might now expect, the figure is somewhat lower in Labour seats located in the North of England and the Midlands, but at 57% it is not significantly different from the proportion (58%) across the North of England and the Midlands as a whole.

So, a substantial minority of 2015 Labour voters in Labour-held seats in the North of England and the Midlands did vote to Leave. But it is no more than a minority. Indeed, it is not much bigger than the proportion of Conservative voters in Conservative-held seats who voted for Remain (37%), a group whose continued loyalty to their party might also be thought to be potentially vulnerable in the wake of the Brexit vote.

Ensuring Labour's survival in the North of England and the Midlands is not just a question of strengthening the party's appeal to the so-called traditional Labour voter who voted to Leave. There are simply not enough of them for that alone to be a viable strategy. Rather, it is also about retaining the support of the majority of Labour voters in the northern half of England who voted to Remain. For without them, the party really will be in trouble.

They're pretty much fucked.

 

[Funky Papa]

GM getting fucked over by Brexit seems a little harsh.

GM has 16 consecutive years of losses amounting to over 15 billion. Something has to done about. If Brexit never happened we'd still be here and Peugeot buying Opel/Vauxhall would be dangerous for UK and Germany just the same as it's part owned by the French government. Naturally if they bought it, jobs in the UK would be in danger. I can't find any PSA UK locations expect the obvious sales part. They've chose to avoid the UK.

If anything Brexit just makes UK jobs more uncertain.

GM is not getting fucked over by Brexit at all.

My point, poorly put out as it may be, is that GM was already in dire straits in the UK due to Ellesmere Port being uncompetitive and using the least amount of EU-made parts. Brexit would essentially fuck them over with tariffs and the delocalisation of manufacturing to mainland Europe. The PSA deal will probably precipitate things now since PSA has no manufacturing interests in the UK of its own. Had not been for Brexit, maybe PSA could have wanted to retain a certain manufacturing presence in the UK out of strategic needs (I wouldn't bet on that given their sales, but hey). Brexit made this proposition extremely unappealing and barring an act of God Vauxhall's fate is now basically sealed.

In separate news, I found this amusing: David Cameron ‘courted’ for top NATO post

U.K. cabinet ministers and a foreign statesman are “courting” David Cameron to raise his hand to be the next secretary general of NATO, according to people familiar with the situation.

Barely half a year since stepping down as prime minister, Cameron has held what one British official called “conversations” about the top job at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Brussels. He’s not ruled it out, though Cameron has on separate occasions refused to make any commitment, these people said.

The post, currently held by the Norwegian Jens Stoltenberg, won’t likely be open for at least another year, and as one person who has talked to him about it noted, Cameron wouldn’t want to jump out of the gate early by declaring his intentions.

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Defense Secretary Michael Fallon want Cameron at NATO, a senior official said.

I can't form a coherent opinion right now.

 

[Jackpot]

Is Labour's Brexit dilemma being misunderstood?



They're pretty much fucked.

I understand they're in a real tough spot. I just don't see why they went with the solution that pissed off every camp.

Enforcing a 3 line whip on leaving before they even knew if their amendments would pass... *shakes head*

 

[tuxfool]

I understand they're in a real tough spot. I just don't see why they went with the solution that pissed off every camp.

Enforcing a 3 line whip on leaving before they even knew if their amendments would pass... *shakes head*

Them going either way as a party is a complete gamble for them, though seemingly the risk/reward of supporting leave doesn't justify gambling the future of the party.

 

[Huw_Dawson]

Is Labour's Brexit dilemma being misunderstood?

They're pretty much fucked.

Corbyn + Brexit? Yeah, the party is in severe trouble.

It'll still take a couple more years for the collapse to happen, but it's in motion now. If the Lib Dems return to, say, their 2005 strength of 16% by 2020, and UKIP don't collapse by then, it seems likely that Labour will see much of their soft vote swing away from them.

 

[Tak3n]

Just saw this on the BBC, seems even London is coming round to Brexit, the demonstration looks very small

https://twitter.com/JSHeappey/status/833701135290662913/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

[FlammableD]

Just saw this on the BBC, seems even London is coming round to Brexit, the demonstration looks very small

https://twitter.com/JSHeappey/status/833701135290662913/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

It's also not supposed to start till 5/6ish, and most people will still be at work.

 

[Tak3n]

It's also not supposed to start till 5/6ish, and most people will still be at work.

ahh...BBC trolled me

 

[tuxfool]

People in government complaining that the press hasn't been critical enough of the Brexit plans...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...extra-costs-for-uk-exporters?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

[Lucreto]

People in government complaining that the press hasn't been critical enough of the Brexit plans...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...extra-costs-for-uk-exporters?CMP=share_btn_tw

The article was talking about beef prices. If let's say they got a deal with the US to sell British beef they will have to lower food standards to be competitive with the US market but this in turn will disqualify British beef from sale in Europe which standards are a lot higher.

 

[phisheep]

The article was talking about beef prices. If let's say they got a deal with the US to sell British beef they will have to lower food standards to be competitive with the US market but this in turn will disqualify British beef from sale in Europe which standards are a lot higher.

They don't have to lower standards, just sell at premium prices. I don't remember the French reducing wine prices particularly.

 

[TimmmV]

They don't have to lower standards, just sell at premium prices. I don't remember the French reducing wine prices particularly.

Would there be a noticeable enough difference between premium US beef and that in the UK to make this a viable tactic?

Also, I thought the reputation of British beef is still tainted by BSE outside the UK? If so, you would think selling it as a premium product will be quite difficult

 

[Lucreto]

Would there be a noticeable enough difference between premium US beef and that in the UK to make this a viable tactic?

Also, I thought the reputation of British beef is still tainted by BSE outside the UK? If so, you would think selling it as a premium product will be quite difficult

Ireland last year got access to the US market as a premium product but they did do as well as they hoped.

 

[chadskin]

I believe numbers have been floating around for a while but here's something more "official" ...

"It will be a difficult negotiation that will take years for us to agree on the exit terms and on the future architecture of relations between the United Kingdom and the European Union," Juncker told the Belgian parliament.

"The British must know -- and they know it already -- that it will not be at a discount or zero cost," the former Luxembourg premier said in his hour-long speech.

"The British are expected to respect the commitments they made. And so the bill, to say it a bit coarsely, will be very hefty," added Juncker.

European sources said Brussels could hand Britain an exit bill of up to 60 billion euros to cover commitments already made by London toward the EU budget.

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/britains-brexit-bill-very-hefty-eus-juncker-004606752.html

 

[Xando]

I believe numbers have been floating around for a while but here's something more "official" ...


https://sg.news.yahoo.com/britains-brexit-bill-very-hefty-eus-juncker-004606752.html

British press is gonna explode when the number is officially announced and i wonder if they're powerful enough to make May walk away from negotiations without any agreement

 

[Mr. Sam]

British press is gonna explode when the number is officially announced and i wonder if they're powerful enough to make May walk away from negotiations without any agreement

May's number one priority seems to be to save face and take the "easy" option rather than pursue the long term benefit of the country and potentially be embarrassed, so... it's a possibility.

 

[Zaph]

May's number one priority seems to be to save face and take the "easy" option rather than pursue the long term benefit of the country and potentially be embarrassed, so... it's a possibility.

I can see the autobiography already "How I stood up to the EU (and did nothing)".

 

[Halph n Halph]

I'm sure Britain will honour the 60 billion commitment , if it means access to the single market and Britain benefiting from whatever the commited funds are for.
I cannot imagine the government will pay and receive nothing in return.

 

[tuxfool]

I'm sure Britain will honour the 60 billion commitment , if it means access to the single market and Britain benefiting from whatever the commited funds are for.
I cannot imagine the government will pay and receive nothing in return.

The bill is for services already received (or in the the process of). It doesn't cover access to the single market.

 

[Xando]

It seems Opel in germany is save for now:

Chancellor Angela Merkel has called the chief executive of PSA Group, the maker of Peugeot and Citroen cars, to discuss its potential takeover of General Motors’ German subsidiary.

Merkel’s spokesman said PSA boss Carlos Tavares told her Tuesday that the Opel unit would remain independent within the group.

The spokesman, Steffen Seibert, said Tavares also assured Merkel that PSA would safeguard Opel’s sites and planned investments and “honor job guarantees.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...f735ee31334_story.html?utm_term=.7a2568fdd60f


Wonder what that means for the UK industry

 

[D4Danger]

I believe numbers have been floating around for a while but here's something more "official" ...


https://sg.news.yahoo.com/britains-brexit-bill-very-hefty-eus-juncker-004606752.html

The German's could cover that with all the money they don't spend on NATO.

 

[GamingKaiju]

It seems Opel in germany is save for now:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...f735ee31334_story.html?utm_term=.7a2568fdd60f


Wonder what that means for the UK industry

Not good at all.

I am wondering when will people realise the scale of what they voted for and for it to dawn on them that they potentially screwed over the whole of the UK.

Brexit is going to reshape Britain forever, good or bad but it's going to happen.

 

[Funky Papa]

It seems Opel in germany is save for now:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...f735ee31334_story.html?utm_term=.7a2568fdd60f


Wonder what that means for the UK industry

Apparently car manufacturers have been assured of getting access to the common market (say what now) along some vague remarks regarding compensation for economic loses.

My guess is that nothing is going to happen and everybody is going to smile as long as current generation products remain in the pipeline. The real drama will happen when factories start competing for future models and companies need to make significant investments for retooling.

The whole PSA/GM thing is not giving me some great vibes considering that PSA's commitments are relatively limited in terms of timetables. I believe they've been promising to keep factories intact, but only until 2020 or so. This also applies to German facilities.

 

[Halph n Halph]

The bill is for services already received (or in the the process of). It doesn't cover access to the single market.

The wording makes it sound like a commitment to future projects not services already received.
If it is a bill for something Britain has already received then it would be better explained as a debt owed and not a payment for commitments made.
I'm sure nobody would pay toward a project that they will gain nothing from.
I would need to look more closely at the facts if there is indeed more to it than what the linked article from the Guardian eludes to.

 

[PdotMichael]

So having debt is now the new weapon of the UK?

 

[Theonik]

The German's could cover that with all the money they don't spend on NATO.

These comments I always find odd. Germany does pay their contributions to NATO. What they don't do is invest 3% of GDP into their armed forces, which is part of the NATO treaties but shouldn't be conflated with the NATO budget.

With Germany in particular it's also a big point of hypocrisy considering Germany's military size is still restricted under the 2 + 4 agreement and many nations in Europe including the UK at the time of re-unification being very weary at supporting Germany having a proper military still.

 

[Halph n Halph]

So having debt is now the new weapon of the UK?

If it is a debt it should be paid. If it's a commitment to future EU projects, then there is no reason the UK should honour something it will no longer have any involvement in.

 

[Theonik]

If it is a debt it should be paid. If it's a commitment to future EU projects, then there is no reason the UK should honour something it will no longer have any involvement in.

What is the difference between a commitment and debt in this context. It is also strange to use the word debt here though.

 

[kmag]

If it is a debt it should be paid. If it's a commitment to future EU projects, then there is no reason the UK should honour something it will no longer have any involvement in.

Putting aside the differences between commitments and liabilities for a second.
That's what we signed up for. The current Multiannual financial framework runs 2014-2020, all EU member states signed up for it. All them had a veto. The UK entered this agreement and wants to exit before the end. Spending decisions were made and timed on the basis of the initial agreements, projects were delayed to towards the end of the cycle in say France or Spain to allow projects to happy in the UK in 2014 or 2015. You get the idea. If you don't want to pay for the remaining part of the MMF, the UK could time it's exit accordingly. It'll still have a shit load of liabilities to pay up for anyway.

 

[Halph n Halph]

What is the difference between a commitment and debt in this context. It is also strange to use the word debt here though.

Strange ? A debt is payment owed for services received or money borrowed. A commitment is simply planned spending on a project the UK would be involved with . On leaving the EU we have pulled out of involvement with EU projects . If a project is already ongoing then we should honour the payment to it and continue to receive the benefit from it .

 

[operon]

The wording makes it sound like a commitment to future projects not services already received.
If it is a bill for something Britain has already received then it would be better explained as a debt owed and not a payment for commitments made.
I'm sure nobody would pay toward a project that they will gain nothing from.
I would need to look more closely at the facts if there is indeed more to it than what the linked article from the Guardian eludes to.

a lot of it is Britains contributions to the pension budget

 

[Halph n Halph]

Putting aside the differences between commitments and liabilities for a second.
That's what we signed up for. The current Multiannual financial framework runs 2014-2020, all EU member states signed up for it. All them had a veto. The UK entered this agreement and wants to exit before the end. Spending decisions were made and timed on the basis of the initial agreements, projects were delayed to towards the end of the cycle in say France or Spain to allow projects to happy in the UK in 2014 or 2015. You get the idea. If you don't want to pay for the remaining part of the MMF, the UK could time it's exit accordingly. It'll still have a shit load of liabilities to pay up for anyway.

Seems fair enough to me . No doubt the Mail will pop a bollock incandescent with rage though.
They are already seem unusually angry with the tories due to the fact that Ruperts scented candles and kindling shop in the village is about to get dry shafted by the new business rates.

 

[chromatic9]

With the 60 billion figure and all these NHS reports I wonder if there's going to be a recommendation from high up to put it on hold. Put on top the Ireland border and possible break up of the UK. Would not be a good time if privatization of the NHS is required.

Some issues that are coming for staying in the EU are the rebate we get expires in 2020 and we'd have to join the Euro in 2020 or soon after.

Another issue is (I don't think she will) if Le Pen wins the election. She's said they will ask the EU for serious reform and if rejected offer and EU ref and Euro ref.

I've heard many EU workers say its needs reforming. UK has decided to leave as it is currently, David Cameron did try but I'm sure the EU would be quick to keep France in. The EU could be proposing something different in 1-2 years time and we might have to vote again to stay in or out a new EU, whatever that could mean.

 

[tuxfool]

dumbasses.